Brexit deal

[BillyStubbsTears]

This is unreal.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47769495

For those who aren't political nerds, the Chief Whip, in normal times is THE most loyal Cabinet member. It's his job to see that whatever Cabinet determines as policy gets implemented in the House. The Chief Whip never, and I mean NEVER criticises Cabinet.

This is the scale of the crisis this Govt has run into. In a nutshell, our Govt has stopped functioning.

[DonnyOsmond]

I don't see why the EU are making the border in Ireland our problem. If Northern Ireland wasn't attached to the republic there wouldn't have been a problem so why have they made it into one?

Because of the Good Friday Agreement? We either break the Good Friday Agreement and have a border (which could possibly lead to more of those bomb weve seen recently), have a border in the Irish Sea between Great Britain and the island of Ireland but keep NI as part of the UK or we give NI to ROI, which the Northern Irish don't want. It's a no win situation and it's not for the EU to work out a solution.

[DonnyOsmond]

I heard/saw something the other day, might have been on here. A member of the cabinet said that the cabinet gets together, half say we should go for idea A, the other half say we should go for idea B and Theresa May picks idea C. This is why we're heading towards something nobody wants.

[The Red Baron]

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/04/why-common-market-2-0-is-the-brexit-we-need/

An explanation of "Common Market 2.0." I have heard quite a few MPs this afternoon saying that this option would involve being in a Customs Union with the EU. This is incorrect, although as the author points out we could derogate from the EEA/ EFTA rules to remain in a temporary CU with the EU until "alternative arrangements" are in place- basically the Irish Backstop.

Apologies if it's TL:DR but that's the text if you can't get past the paywall.

In recent weeks, there has been a lot of inaccurate media coverage of Common Market 2.0, which proposes that the UK should remain a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) after Brexit. The fundamental purpose of the EEA Agreement is to extend the benefits of the single market to countries that are outside the European Union but members of the European Free Trade Association (Efta). EEA membership for non-EU states involves accepting the rules of the single market – including the four freedoms – but excludes other EU policies that many in the UK dislike, such as economic and monetary union, political union, the common agricultural policy, the common fisheries policy, and other common policies.
The advantages of retaining deep levels of access by UK suppliers to the single market in goods and services are widely accepted. But truly “frictionless” access can be achieved only if the EU is confident that single market rules are correctly applied and if there is a process for updating our rules as the EU’s rules develop. This is what the EEA Agreement achieves. The Agreement was designed with the expectation that Sweden, Austria, Finland and Switzerland would also take part, so it was explicitly designed to cope with a large number of states. It sets out a workable answer to questions routinely ducked by those proposing a “common rule book” or “strong single market alignment”: how would UK compliance be monitored and enforced? And what will happen if the EU law to which the UK has “aligned” then develops?
The EEA Agreement is different from the framework of EU law which applies to the UK as a member of the EU. EEA law does not have “direct effect”: it has effect only because national parliaments have incorporated its rules into their own law. While the EEA/Efta States do not have votes on new EU laws, they have a right to be consulted and, crucially, every EEA/EFTA State has to agree before new EU single market law is carried over into the EEA Agreement.  If they do not agree, there is a process in which the two sides try to reach agreement on what should be carried over, failing which the relevant part of the EEA Agreement is suspended.
Of course, it would not be sensible for the UK to go into an EEA/EFTA arrangement intending to refuse to carry over new EU law routinely. But the suggestion that EEA/EFTA states are pure ‘rule-takers’ is simply wrong: the right to be consulted has real teeth, since, if their legitimate concerns are ignored, they can ultimately refuse to carry over the unacceptable provision.

If the UK became an EEA/EFTA State, it would have the right to appoint a judge onto the EFTA Court (which resolves disputes over interpretation of EEA law) as well as a UK member of, and officials at, the EFTA Surveillance Authority (which enforces compliance by the EEA/EFTA States with their obligations, and applied competition and State aid rules). The importance of those bodies vis-à-vis the European Court of Justice and the Commission would increase, as they would have more cases to deal with. So the UK would retain at least some of its considerable influence over the day-to-day development of single market law.
Some have questioned whether UK membership of EEA/EFTA is negotiable. That is a political question, of course. But the UK Government itself accepted in a 2017 case before the High Court that, in the absence of an agreement with all the other EEA Member States or a formal notice to leave the EEA (and this has never been served), the UK would remain “listed as” a party to the EEA Agreement after it left the EU. So the Government accepted in court that the legal default is that the UK remains a member of the EEA after Brexit, although the Government believes the UK’s membership would not be operational.
Some have raised questions about the compatibility of membership of EFTA with the comprehensive customs arrangement that we will need to enter to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland or in the Irish Sea – at least until alternative arrangements that guarantee frictionless trade have been agreed with the EU. It is true that the four existing EFTA States will need to agree that the UK could derogate, at least for a while, from a few provisions of the EFTA Convention (in particular, the requirement to try to accede to existing EFTA/third country free trade agreements).  But there is no reason why that could not be agreed: derogations are frequently found in accession agreements, and it is hard to see why a derogation of that kind would be a deal-breaker.
Ultimately, the decision to accept or reject Common Market 2.0 is a political question. But, when so much hangs on the outcome of tonight’s vote, the decision to support or oppose the Common Market 2.0 motion should be taken on the basis of an accurate understanding of what it involves.
George Peretz QC is part of the Future Relationship Working Group set up by Common Market 2.0 to revise the Political Declaration

[wilts rover]

Peston expecting CM2.0 to get over 300 votes tonight now Labour are whipping for it. So if not a majority then very close to it.

https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1112723381135265792

What he doesn't say is that after Julian Smith's comments its irrevelant what the Tories whip for as they can now do as they like - we can just take that as a given. Be interesting to see if enough do vote for it to give it a majority.

[The Red Baron]

The SNP have also said they'll vote for it. It will probably get a majority because there are some Tories who back it.

It will be interesting to see how TIG and the DUP vote on this one and Ken Clarke's CU motion.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.

Questionable if it is the best outcome.  On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't?  Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1112746689960513539

God up above.

[Glyn_Wigley]

It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.

Questionable if it is the best outcome.  On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't?  Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....

The biggest thing is no need for a backstop. That's what's made a lot of MPs vote against May's deal.

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://mobile.twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/1112691941400039429

Remember this folks, the next time you get your collar felt.

"Oh sorry officer. I didn't realise I was committing a crime. Someone told me it was OK."

Should work fine. The Tory MPs who ran Vote Leave seem to have got away with it.

[Filo]

https://mobile.twitter.com/SamCoatesTimes/status/1112746689960513539

God up above.

That has to be an April fool

[Copps is Magic]

The way MPs are talking several of the propositions will pass tonight.

[BillyStubbsTears]

That's what I thought Filo.

If it is, it's conned Evan Davies and Naheem Zahawi (who seems to be May's  human shield at the moment) cos they were discussing it on R4 PM programme earlier.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.

If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...

Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.

[The Red Baron]

The way MPs are talking several of the propositions will pass tonight.

I'm not sure if that's necessarily a good thing. Better that one option gets a majority than two or three.

[The Red Baron]

Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.

If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...

Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.

It's come up on the rails a bit because it wasn't the most popular or second most popular last week.

I think it's probably the best option available, but the cynic in me makes me wonder if Remainers see it as a vehicle by which we might eventually rejoin the EU in full. Previously they have backed a Second Referendum, but as we know, such things can be unpredictable.

[i_ateallthepies]

Coops. Word I've heard is that the Norway+ deal will win by 50 votes.

If so, that's the least bad Brexit. Worse than staying in, because we get all the benefits of staying in and all the costs, but no say. But if that's what it takes to finish this madness without crippling us...

Also, if it's true, I've some apologising to do to Albie because he was predicting this months ago and I said I couldn't see it happening.

But will it end the madness BST?  Nige, JRM and the usual Media suspects will just see it as another way to whip up more anti EU mania.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.

Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.

[IDM]

I struggle to come to grips with the concept of agreeing the “least worst” outcome..

It’s like being right in the shit, but arguing how deep in the shit we are happy to go..

[The Red Baron]

Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.

Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.

I think we can agree that the Conservative Party in its current form is finished, whatever the outcome of the Brexit process.

David Cameron really did well, didn't he?

[The Red Baron]

The SNP have also said they'll vote for it. It will probably get a majority because there are some Tories who back it.

It will be interesting to see how TIG and the DUP vote on this one and Ken Clarke's CU motion.

The DUP are abstaining on everything. At least one Lib Dem has abstained on the CU and CM2.0 motions and voted for the other two.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

It's an interesting option that's for sure, the interesting thing if it wins is that both the Labour and Tory manifestos were against freedom of movement, that would be questioned for many I'm sure.

Questionable if it is the best outcome.  On the face of it a number of benefits but what does that proposal give that the TM deal didn't?  Largely that it wasn't proposed by the government.....

The biggest thing is no need for a backstop. That's what's made a lot of MPs vote against May's deal.

Some suggestion actually that it does still need a WA.

The interesting thing will be what the government does after tonight's votes....

[BillyStubbsTears]

Here's a guess BFYP.

700  of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Here's a guess BFYP.

700  of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.

I demand a recount!!

[BillyStubbsTears]

No Glyn. It REALLY WOULD be the 4th time.

[Glyn_Wigley]

Here's a guess BFYP.

700  of the 650 MPs vote for Common Market 2.0 and May says she's bringing her deal back for a 4th go.

*ahem*

PS If anything gets a positive vote tonight I can't see there being any chance whatsoever that Bercow would allow May to put her deal before the Commons again.

[bpoolrover]

Oh aye. I agree with that pies. But they can just wreak their havoc destroying the Tory party.

Speaking of Rees-Mogg, did you see the depths he plumbed this morning? Tweeting agreement with a neo-Nazi party from Germany. I have confidence that we're too grown up a country ever to let someone like him get to lead the nation, but he does scare me. There were bas**rds like him in the 1930s commenting favourably on the original Nazis. Dangerous, self-serving amoralists.

. The AfD leader asks "Is it any wonder the British see bad faith behind every manoeuvre from Brussels?" https://youtu.be/63IcW4eo4uM what’s Mogg said that’s bad?

[BillyStubbsTears]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Peston/status/1112802058296492032

Interesting recent polling figures. The Tories have dropped to mid-30s with Labour over the past couple of weeks. Hard to see Cabinet going for a snap Election in these circumstances.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Yes Bpool. And Rees-Mogg replied approvingly. So he's agreeing with a neo-Nazi party.

[SydneyRover]

<Ian Fox states that being in a CU with the EU would be trying to negotiate with one arm tied behind your back.

Maybe better than being gaffer taped head to foot as we are now then?

On a good note I read yesterday the Germany wanted to offer free movement for UK citizens regardless of ConBrexit outcomes.